Contemplating the affective experience of “leftist genre fiction” (however that’s understood) and the false dichotomy of escapist media debates.
Rather than “escapist [simplistic, rudimentary, genre] media is inherently bad” or “escapist [simplistic, rudimentary, genre] media is inherently good”, can we recognize the affective pleasures of these works as reliant on the heightened realities they depict and inherently value-neutral? Judgements about political utility of the work come into play where the work meets the interstice of art and life. Does a work prompt the reader to reengage with the world around them in a thoughtful and pro-social way?
Moreover, does the reader have tools necessary to engage critically with the works–most of them–that fall between radical and reactionary in their ideological engagement?
These works need not be revolutionary in content–see the queer appeal of palace intrigue
What’s the function of art in activist movements? Not to win hearts and minds but to nourish and replenish the ones already fighting (note this doesn’t mean art has to be “nice” or “hopeful” —in fact often the opposite)